Are you Offended?
Did you ever get offended by any of the post I have written here? I am asking because an avid reader sent me an email regarding one promo I have blogged about. It got me wondering if I should be more finicky on the choice of promos and contest I feature here. I explained to her that my only intent was to notify readers about a promotion. However, I cannot discredit the fact that other minors may be reading my blog.
Here is her letter:
Dear Jeffrey,
It is the height of irony to come across a contest that is the epitome
of greed, unrestrained pursuit of pleasure, and selfishness, in a
season that calls for abstinence, fasting, and self-control. I am
referring to the FHM contest, "Ride for Pleasure," whose aim is to
raffle away a car to the person who best answers the question, "In one
sentence, how can you describe your unforgettable sex-perience using
PREMIERE condoms?" You are encouraged to give as many entries, one
entry being a box of condoms.
I have written the Department of Health protesting its participation
in this contest, which contradicts both its statement that it is not
"advocating sexual licentiousness" and its three-pronged ABC campaign.
How can its spokesman say that the DOH is not "advocating sexual
licentiousness" when it aligns itself with a magazine that is all
about sexual licentiousness, promiscuity, and treating women as sex
objects? How can it say it is not promoting licentiousness when it
supports a contest that is clearly targeted to unmarried couples who
are encouraged to engage in irresponsible sex, heedless of the
consequences and without even a nod to responsibility?
As for its ABC campaign--A stands for Abstinence, B for Be faithful to
your partner, and C for Condoms--where does abstinence and being
faithful stand in a contest that looks at the sex act as a nothing
more than a ticket to a prize, with condoms as your currency, the
more, the better. Why should couples practice abstinence and
faithfulness when they can have as many partners as they want, when
they want, just because they can have protected sex with free and
readily available condoms? Is this really the mindset and the message
that the DOH is promoting? Is the ABC campaign just a cover for
rationalizing its three-pronged approach when in reality, its goal is
really primarily the promotion of condoms? Are DOH officials not
deceiving themselves and the public then with actions that contradict
their statements?
We have lost much of our moral compass today. Reprehensible and
irresponsible contests like this do not help any.
Sincerely,
Cathy Quiogue
What do you think? Should I refuse to feature brands/products that are sexual in nature? Please share your insights on this matter. I really want to hear out what you guys have to say.
